hiroshima anniversary

Discussion in 'Off Topic' started by -WinterKnight-, Aug 6, 2015.

  1. I'm glad it was bombed, it helped stop the war. Don't blame USA, blame the reluctant to surrender Selfish Japanese generals :/
     
  2. It might have been necessary at the time, but I don't think you should be glad about something so vile.
     
  3. There would have been far more deaths had we not dropped the bomb. Both from japan and the US.

    Attack a US navy base, expect retaliation. I suspect japan knew America would knock on the door, too bad freedom rings!
     
  4. We need to use more nuclear weapons.
     
  5. And there we have it. The attitude of some Americans to this whole topic is twisted; should they contemplate fully the impact of what was decided and understand its proper context I'd be fine, but instead they blindly spew ignorant and simple rhetoric about American exceptionalism, then rage against anyone who defies their shallow knowledge.

    It's certainly a problem that needs addressing, because it seriously undermines your "argument".
     
  6. Any reason behind that statement or just you think being able to kill humanity a couple times over isn't enough overkill ?
     
  7.  he didn't say we need to make more, he said we need to "use" more lol
     
  8. Wrongo....
    Blame those who don't war.

    Grats on Shattered Sword kiddo


    Is this one of those born every minute ppl?
    Pick a random target............spin da wheel
     
  9. A necessary evil at the time .....right decision as it probably saved way more lives than it took
     
  10. Yes because that makes his statement less moronic. 

    Humanity has been extremely lucky that we've survived the last 70 yrs without some idiot thinking nuclear weapons should be used and worse using them.
     
  11. Actually George bush was talked out of using a tactical nuke on Baghdad at the beginning of the gulf war.

    In hindsight would we have all the terrorist acts worldwide now and Isis situation if the world had been sent the message that they are still the number one deterrent.

    Will never know the answer to that. But yes someone was willing. He was just talked out of it. For better or worse.
    Don't forget those still in the process of trying to develop nuclear bombs are less tolerant and far more willing to use them, than western counterparts.
     
  12. Probably...
    Fantastic assumption...
    Lets see 1/4m ppl turned into dust.
    Thats a good head start to overcome.
    Any starting pitcher can work with that lead.

    Necessary evil at the time.
    Thats a very curious statement based on what info exactly?
    Ah but of course from a govt n we all know how transparent n honest they all r.
    Bar none.
    Crap thats why we vote them in cuz we r too stupid to make those big decisions n they have all the right answers.

    Guess it all boils down to which history book written by whom is most factual. None of them r fully the entire truth either.
     
  13. Absolutely zero proof of that.
    USA 2 the rest of World 0
    Pitched a shut out.
     
  14. Which George Bush? which gulf War ?
     
  15. They reckon the war would have lasted another 2 years had the nuke not happened and japan had made the statement that it eould never surrender n that every man woman n child would be called to arms n would be willing to die for the country .

    So yes it saved more lives than it took...FACT !
     
  16. 1/4 of a million is the wrong figure for the A bombs
    Conventional bombing claimed more lives in Tokyo than either Hiroshima or Nagasaki.

    First gulf war.

    And so many willing to call for bloodshed so often.
    The bombs were dropped to shock a nation into submission.
    Without the bombs the war would have dragged on and millions more American and Japanese lives would have been lost.
    Civilian casualties are an undeniable part of war. Sometimes even a necessary evil to bring about a goal.
    Whether agreed with today or not. Whatever the motives. It was a tragic loss of civilian lives.
    Thousands of lives wasted at once the same pain that the rest of the entire world new at the time. Millions died for the ignorance of the leadership in those times.
    The lesson to be learned.
    Hopefully we remember the losses and devastation. And never repeat such futility.
     
  17. Blockade the country form supply's they will eventually surrender cause no food No nuke needed.
    Also if bush used nukes we would have more terrorists so what would be the point.
     
  18. Blockade?
    Geez i recall that working long ago for another nation.
    Now who was that again?

    History teaches nothin to those that ignore it
     
  19. Yea nighthawk it didn't go well for Germany basicly blockading England during ww2 where they almost sunk every ship going there. Would of worked too if England didn't get the mine Germany wanted to use.

    England was only able to counter the mines because one plane dropped it on land.

    But hey England almost starved to death or to the point of surrender but don't worry it's totally ineffective.
     

  20. Germany was never able to maintain a long term blockade of the uk in ww2. The Royal Navy USN and candian navies kept the country open.
    There were mines used but those weren't ever the most concerning thing the U boats S boats and surface raiders were far more dangerous